Pastoral Reflections on the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass

Archdiocese of NY ^ | unknown | John Cardinal O'Connor

[NYer]

Pastoral Reflections on the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass

By CARDINAL JOHN J. O'CONNOR

III. Do This in Memory of Me [Lk. 22:19]

Had the celebration of the Mass in English begun in the United States in, let us say, the 1930s or '40s, or been simply a translation of the "Tridentine" Mass that Church-going Catholics were accustomed to, the transition might not have aroused a great deal of emotion. The 1960s and '70s, however, were turbulent years. As we have noted before, the "establishment" became suspect, as did hierarchical leadership. Authority in general became discredited. Young people, especially, looked horizontally for leadership, rather than to their seniors or elders. It became virtually an axiom to trust no one 30 or older. Not a few adults tried to dress and imitate the young, thinking themselves "hip." The response by the young was simply to become further confused.

Moreover, these were the years of guitar-accompanied sing-alongs, rock and roll music festivals and a new kind of inherently contradictory togetherness, in which everyone was equal and each was free to do his or her own thing.

When the Mass appeared in English, some priests seized the initiative, with the best of intentions, to advance congregational participation. In some churches everyone was invited to stand around the altar during the entirety of the Mass, to sing along the many verses of modern hymns, some of them cabaret songs put to quasi-scriptural themes. Sunday "go-to-meeting" clothes were out; dressing down was in. Bleached bluejeans became de rigeur for guitar players in the sanctuary. Mass had to be "meaningful," and, above all, fun. The emphasis became to gather 'round the table of the Lord as one, big, happy family.

There was generally much sincerity in this "democratic" approach to the Sacred Liturgy, and a number of priests and other adults were happy that young people were less resistant about coming to Mass and were even going home to tell what a good time they had had. Yet, a grave misunderstanding was developing, too often escaping notice. The Mass came to be thought of as a celebration of "fellowship" which culminated in Communion. Less and less frequently did one hear the term, "the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass." And with a loss of awareness of the Mass as a sacrifice came a loss of awareness of the priest as sacrificer. In some cases the priest seemed to become primarily the leader of the "Communion service," but only one among equals. The uniqueness of the priest seemed, indeed, to be an undemocratic anachronism. (Later, although the quite legitimate descriptions of the priest as President of the Assembly and Presider at the Eucharist came into use, in some cases the distinction between the ordained priest and all others had already been lost.)

Yet, Pope John Paul II calls the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass the principal and central reason for the priest's very existence. It is imperative, in my judgment, that we recognize the uniqueness of the ordained priest and the reality of the Mass as sacrifice. The failure to do so, I believe, is one of the big reasons for the paucity of vocations to the priesthood. The pope tells us in his encyclical "Mediator Dei":

"The unbloody immolation at the words of consecration, when Christ is made present upon the altar in the state of a victim, is performed by the priest and by him alone, as the representative of Christ..." (p. 35)

Indeed, already in 1945, in his "Priests Among Men," Emmanuel Cardinal Suhard, Archbishop of Paris, had spoken boldly of the unique role of the priest:

"The priest is always present in the Church. At all times, along with the Holy Spirit, he is the source of her permanence and her life."

It is imperative to understand that, while rightfully recalling the role of all the baptized as "a spiritual temple, a holy priesthood...a chosen race, a royal priesthood," (1 Peter 2, 5,9) these words mean that the baptized are now taken out of the "world" and consecrated as God's own, bought by the Blood of Christ, the High Priest, and participating in his priesthood. Again, we turn to the encyclical "Mediator Dei":

"By the waters of Baptism, as by common right, Christians are made members of the Mystical Body of Christ the Priest, and by the 'character' which is imprinted on these souls, they are appointed to give worship to God. Thus they participate, according to their condition, in the priesthood of Christ." (p. 34)

The ordained priest, on the other hand, while participating in Christ's priesthood, is lifted up into a unique state by the Sacrament of Holy Orders. The letter to the Hebrews calls the priest "a man taken from among men for the things that pertain to God." [5.1] The priest is given transcendent power to forgive sins, to administer the sacraments, but most of all to offer the Eucharistic Sacrifice, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, in which he becomes an "alter Christus," another Christ. Cardinal Suhard's words describe beautifully the priest's role as alter Christus in the Mass:

"...without the priest there would be no Eucharistic Celebration, no sacramental Victim, no Mass. If there were no Mass the whole offering of the world would be futile...The whole effort of men to bring the universe back to God would be ineffectual and incomplete. For the Sacrifice of the Mass, because it continues the Sacrifice of the Cross, constitutes the essential act and the culminating point of Christ's redeeming mediation.

"So by his power over the sacramental body of Christ the priest becomes by continuation the privileged instrument of the consecration of the world. In that brief moment when he holds the Host in his hands and allows the Sovereign Priest to utter the words of consecration through his lips, the most insignificant and humble priest embraces the whole universe and continues the process of redemption." (pp. 71-72)

This portion of our Pastoral Reflections, however, is not intended as an exaltation of the ordained priesthood, but as a suggestion that we must refocus on the Mass as sacrifice, not merely as "fellowship," or a get-together, or a Communion service. The celebrant specifically urges the entire congregation during the Offertory of the Mass:

"Pray, my brothers and sisters, that your sacrifice and mine may be acceptable to God, the Father Almighty."

We shall be reflecting later on the Mass and music, but mention here only that Catholics, at least in part, have often been called poor hymn singers and priests have been called poor preachers. I suspect that both weaknesses, where they have existed, have been due, in part, to an emphasis on the objectivity of the Mass. Regardless of the dispositions of the priest--he could even be in the state of mortal sin--or the inattention or indifference or non-participation of the congregation, the Sacrifice takes place: bread becomes the Body, wine becomes the Blood of Christ. Since liturgical reforms, more have come to understand that we must become dynamically involved, participating to the fullest, worshiping, adoring, offering ourselves in sacrifice, pleading that as bread becomes the Body and wine becomes the Blood, so we, too, become transformed into everything God wants us to be.

We don't achieve this, however, by political correctness, by "democratizing" the Sacrifice of the Mass. The ordained priest acts directly in the name of Christ; the faithful share in Christ's priesthood through baptism. Each has a sacred role; one is not the other. The Second Vatican Council, in Presbyterorum Ordinis, reminds us that:

"...every priest in his own way bears the person of Christ" and that his role: "flows especially from the Eucharistic sacrifice, which is therefore the center and root of the whole life of the priest..." (p. 14)

To come full circle: While the Mass should not be grim and forbidding, it is the profoundest of mysteries, in which all the power of the crucifixion, death, and resurrection of Christ is again transmitted throughout the world. We pray as we believe. If we really believe what happens when the priest says over a piece of bread, "This is my Body," over a cup of wine, "This is my Blood," our prayer becomes one of profound reverence, of deep joy, of unbounded gratitude.

[NYer]

John Cardinal O'Connor was called home in May of 2000. He was an extraordinary man! Fr. Benedict Groeschel has taken up his cause for sainthood.

Requiéscat in pacem.

[NYer]

Cardinal John O'Connor gets last word at his own funeral

05/19/2000
By John Mallon*

Columns by John Mallon

BERNARD Law did his old friend proud.

For those who missed it, the Cardinal Archbishop of Boston preached at the funeral of his close friend John O'Connor, the Cardinal Archbishop of New York.  O'Connor was a bold and fierce preacher on the subject closest to his heart: the sanctity of human life.  

The funeral, broadcast live nationwide, was attended by the president and vice president, their wives and numerous dignitaries including the mayor of New York City.  

At one point in the sermon, O'Connor's hand picked homilist said, "What a great legacy he has left us in his constant reminder that the Church must always be unambiguously pro- life."

There was a beat and then applause broke out.  It grew louder, increasing as the cameras fixed on the Clinton-Gore party showing them on screens throughout the cathedral.  Cardinal Law attempted to quiet the crowd with his hand, when suddenly the congregation began to stand up, applauding in a wave that moved from the back of the church to the front.  If it hadn't been a funeral they would have cheered.  It was a defiant, pivotal moment.  

Then the bishops and cardinals in the sanctuary stood up.  The elder George Bush stood up applauding, as did his son somewhere off camera.  The camera panned back to the Clinton- Gore party who looked bemused and bewildered.  

Having no water glasses to reach for as they did in 1994 when Mother Teresa received a thunderous ovation for telling the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington that there could be no peace as long as a mother could kill the child in her womb, Clinton leaned back and started whispering in Hillary's ear.  Gore's face was as blank, flat and white as a sheet of paper.  Behind them another abortion "rights" supporter, Rudy Giuliani, began to applaud, albeit weakly, and stood.  And lest they be the only ones left seated, the Clintons and Gores lamely stood up but refrained from applauding.  

It was not Cardinal Law's intent to embarrass anyone.  He was merely doing his job and honoring his friend.  The vehement applause came from the people.  

When the applause subsided, Law quipped, "I see he hasn't left the pulpit." Even a news commentator said it was as if O'Connor himself had spoken "from beyond the grave." Even through the TV screen you could feel the presence of that humble but larger than life churchman fill St. Patrick's Cathedral one last time, driving home the message he lived.

The leaders of the free world are currently the hierarchy of the culture of death and it is difficult to know what those poll-conscious politicians took away from that anointed moment, but I have some suggestions.

Perhaps they can no longer smugly snicker up their sleeves, take the Catholic vote for granted and play us for suckers.  They can no longer ridicule other Christians and pro-lifers while claiming to be "compassionate" and "for the children" as they condone scissors being driven into infants' skulls, their brains sucked out and the unborn chopped into pieces and sucked out of their mothers with industrial strength vacuum machines.  They are on the wrong side of history.  In no small part thanks to John O'Connor, the future belongs to life.

Well done, Cardinal O'Connor.  Requiéscat in pacem.

[narses]

A Militant Ping.

[Dajjal]

Post #2 was right before Cardinal Law distributed Holy Communion to Bill & Hillary.

[Polycarp]

The leaders of the free world are currently the hierarchy of the culture of death and it is difficult to know what those poll-conscious politicians took away from that anointed moment, but I have some suggestions.

Perhaps they can no longer smugly snicker up their sleeves, take the Catholic vote for granted and play us for suckers. They can no longer ridicule other Christians and pro-lifers while claiming to be "compassionate" and "for the children" as they condone scissors being driven into infants' skulls, their brains sucked out and the unborn chopped into pieces and sucked out of their mothers with industrial strength vacuum machines. They are on the wrong side of history. In no small part thanks to John O'Connor, the future belongs to life.

AWESOME!

[Salvation]

** It is imperative, in my judgment, that we recognize the uniqueness of the ordained priest and the reality of the Mass as sacrifice.**

Agree with Cardinal O'Connor completely here!

[Salvation]

**The ordained priest, on the other hand, while participating in Christ's priesthood, is lifted up into a unique state by the Sacrament of Holy Orders. The letter to the Hebrews calls the priest "a man taken from among men for the things that pertain to God." [5.1] The priest is given transcendent power to forgive sins, to administer the sacraments, but most of all to offer the Eucharistic Sacrifice, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, in which he becomes an "alter Christus," another Christ.**

Beautiful. We need to lift up our bishops, priests and ordained deacons.

[Salvation]

**Pray, my brothers and sisters, that your sacrifice and mine may be acceptable to God, the Father Almighty."**

Regardless of the language in which the Sacrifice of the Mass is said!

[cebadams]

Perhaps they can no longer smugly snicker up their sleeves, take the Catholic vote for granted and play us for suckers. They can no longer ridicule other Christians and pro-lifers while claiming to be "compassionate" and "for the children" ...

Nice thought but it isn't likely to happen. Cardinal O'Connor and Mother Teresa displayed tremendous leadership qualities -- they clearly defined their positions and used all opportunities to advance them. Furthermore, they both had national media exposure. Here's the quote that sums it up:

"What a great legacy he has left us in his constant reminder that the Church must always be unambiguously pro- life."

Sorely lacking in the U.S. today are nationally recognized Catholic Bishops who clearly advocate Catholic moral theology at every public opportunity. Witness, as an example, the failures of Cardinal Maida to publicly and personally advance any pro-life message or even to counter the public pro-choice opinions of some of his own pastors during the recent Grandholm campaign for governor. Cardinal Maida isn't alone here. I can't think of a single bold, pro-Catholic statement made by a Cardinal in many years.

Catholics react strongly and favorably to leadership whenever it is demonstrated. We are looking for a shepard -- not a head sheep.

[man of Yosemite]

It is a dangerous thing to elevate priests over the common laity, and give them a postion that Christ never intended that they have. Jesus said that those who would be greatest among us should be our servants. How does a priest maintain this state of humility if people want to elevate him to be acting as Christ himself? This was the problem in Israel when the priesthood of the Jews abandoned their place as shepherds of God's flock, and lifted themselves above the common man. This is what caused the Cheif Shepherd to come down from heaven and give his life for the sheep. It says in the prophets that God was against those shepherds which disregarded the flock of God for their own gain. Priests should be respected as elders of the church, but they ought not to assume any position over the flock that induces pride.

[NYer]

It is a dangerous thing to elevate priests over the common laity, and give them a postion that Christ never intended that they have. Jesus said that those who would be greatest among us should be our servants.

The word priest (Germ. Priester; Fr. prêtre; Ital. prete) is derived from the Greek presbyteros (the elder, as distinguished from neoteros, the younger), and is, in the hieratical sense, equivalent to the Latin sacerdos, the Greek iereus, and the Hebrew kahane. By the term is meant a (male) person called to the immediate service of the Deity and authorized to hold public worship, especially to offer sacrifice. In many instances the priest is the religious mediator between God (gods) and man and the appointed teacher of religious truths, especially when these include esoteric doctrines. To apply the word priest to the magicians, prophets, and medicine-men of the religions of primitive peoples is a misuse of the term. The essential correlative of priesthood is sacrifice, consequently, mere leaders in the public prayers or guardians of shrines have no claim to the title priest.

Passing entirely over the supernatural blessings derived by mankind from the prayers of the priesthood, the celebration of the Holy Sacrifice, and the administration of the sacraments, secular civilization, which, through the Catholic priesthood, has spread to all nations and brought into full bloom religion, morality, science, art, and industry. If religion in general is the mother of all culture, Christianity must be acknowledged as the source, measure, and nursery of all true civilization. The Church, the oldest and most successful teacher of mankind, has in each century done pioneer service in all departments of culture. Through her organs, the priests and especially the members of the religious orders, she carried the light of Faith to all lands, banished the darkness of paganism, and with the Gospel brought the blessings of Christian morality and education. What would have become of the countries about the Mediterranean during the epoch of the migration of the nations (from 375) if the popes, bishops, and clergy had not tamed the German hordes, converted them from Arianism to Catholicism, and out of barbarism evolved order? What Ireland owes to St. Patrick, England owes to St. Augustine, who, sent by Pope Gregory the Great, brought not only the Gospel, but also a higher morality and culture. While the light of Christianity thus burned brightly in Ireland and Britain, part of Germany was still shrouded in the darkness of paganism. Bands of missionaries from the Island of Saints now brought to the continent the message of salvation and established new centres of culture. Charlemagne's great work of uniting all the German tribes into an empire was only the glorious fruit of the seed sown by St. Boniface of Certon (d. 755) on German soil and watered with the blood of martyrs. The Church of the Middle Ages, having now attained to power, continued through her priests to propagate the Gospel in pagan lands. It was missionaries who first brought to Europe news of the existence of China. In 1246 three Franciscans, commissioned by the pope, appeared in audience before the emperor of the Mongols; in 1306 the first Christian church was built in Peking. From the Volga to the Desert of Gobi, the Franciscans and Dominicans covered the land with their missionary stations. In the sixteenth century the zeal of the older orders was rivalled by the Jesuits, among whom St. Francis Xavier must be accorded a place of honour; their achievements in the Reductions of Paraguay are as incontestable as their great services in the United States. As for the French colonies in America, the American historian Bancroft declares that no notable city was founded, no river explored, no cape circumnavigated, without a Jesuit showing the way. Even if Buckle's one-sided statement were true, viz. that culture is not the result of religion, but vice versa, we could point to the work of Catholic missionaries, who are striving to lift the savages in pagan lands to a higher state of morality and civilization, and thence to transform them into decent Christians.

[Salvation]

**Sorely lacking in the U.S. today are nationally recognized Catholic Bishops who clearly advocate Catholic moral theology at every public opportunity.**

This is true. However, there were a couple last week who did the right thing.

One speaking at a Catholic University.

Another cancelling his appointment to speak.

Seems like there was one more, but I am having a lapse of recall right now. LOL!

[cebadams]

Many speak out occassionally. Most do so only under influence and/or pressure from others. Most would rather stay silent.

We applauded Cardinal Arinze for making these remarks last week:

In many parts of the world, the family is under siege," Arinze said, according to a transcript of his remarks provided by the university. "It is opposed by an anti-life mentality as is seen in contraception, abortion, infanticide and euthanasia. It is scorned and banalized by pornography, desecrated by fornication and adultery, mocked by homosexuality, sabotaged by irregular unions and cut in two by divorce."

Is this message so difficult to advocate? Sometimes a shepard needs to use the hook end of the staff.

[Salvation]

I think it was Arch/bishop? Reilly that refused to speak somewhere -- had to do with abortion support, I believe.

[nickcarraway]

No! Cardinal John O'Connor did not get the last word at his own funeral!

In fact, Cardinal O'Connor quite clearly asked that President Clinton not be allowed to attend his funeral. But, quite disrespectfully to Cardinal O'Connor, President Clinton was there. Cardinal O'Connor's own requests for his funeral were obviously irreoloevant.

[Desdemona]

But, quite disrespectfully to Cardinal O'Connor, President Clinton was there. Cardinal O'Connor's own requests for his funeral were obviously irreoloevant.

BUMP

[Gophack]

Great read.

God bless!

[man of Yosemite]

It is true that priests have done many selfless acts to promote the faith of the Lord Jesus. I am questioning whether this type of priesthood is not very similar to the priesthood of Judaism, which priesthood was no longer necessary when Christ was made a high priest forever after the order of Melchisadek. The scriptures mention elders and bishops as overseers to the church, but I'm not sure they had any intention of creating the type of priesthood now practiced in Catholicism. Even Peter himself had a wife which now is not allowed to priests. This rule of celibacy has created great problems among the Catholic priesthood. If the man who founded the church in Rome, which is said to be Peter among Catholics, was allowed to be married, then how do we now have a priesthood forbidden to marry?

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

I am questioning whether this type of priesthood is not very similar to the priesthood of Judaism, which priesthood was no longer necessary when Christ was made a high priest forever after the order of Melchisadek. The scriptures mention elders and bishops as overseers to the church, but I'm not sure they had any intention of creating the type of priesthood now practiced in Catholicism.

In 2 Chronicles 19:11 and Malachi 2:7 there is evidence of the living continuing authority of the Mosaic priesthood. Isaiah in Chapter 22:20-25 makes a very interesting prophecy. His oracle states there will be an abolition of the Old Testament high priests and the establishment of a new priesthood of the House of David. This priesthood is very specific however.

On that day I will summon my servant Eliakim (means loyal to God), son of Hilkiah; I will clothe him with your robe, and gird him with your sash, and give over to him your authority. He shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah. I will place the key of the House of David on his shoulder; when he opens, no one shall shut, when he shuts, no one shall open.......etc.

Very interesting. It sounds like a passage in the New Testament.

Matthew 16:18-19 I for my part declare to you, you are 'Rock', and on this rock I will build my church, and the jaws of death shall not prevail against it. I will entrust to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you declare bound on earth shall be bound in heaven; whatever you declare loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

But, none of this went into effect before Christ's death. In fact, when Jesus admonishes the scribes and Pharisees for their hypocrisy he still acknowledges their priestly authority (Matthew 23:1-3). The Old Testament sacrifice, ritual and law was in effect until it was replaced by the NT Sacrifice on the Cross. With the New Covenant came a new priesthood. The Commission of the Apostles in Matthew 28 and Pentecost began their priesthood (also Mark 16, Luke 24:44-49,John 20:22-23, Acts 2).

In Acts Chapter 1 there is direct mention of the special apostolic office and ministry which has been established: May another take his office and again in verses 24-25, Make known to us which of these two you choose for this apostolic ministry, replacing Judas, who deserted the cause and went the way he was destined to go. This directly says the Apostles knew their position was an office and set apart from other believers.

In Acts 6 they recognize the need for assistants due to the growth of the Christian community. This is the first example (of many) I can find of the Apostolic transmission of Holy Orders to earthly men: They presented these men to the apostles, who first prayed over them and then imposed hands on them. The word of God continued to spread, while at the same time the number of the disciples in Jerusalem enormously increased. There were many priests among those who embraced the faith.

Acts also makes it clear that Peter and the apostles no longer submit to the authority of the Jewish Sanhedrin.

[man of Yosemite]

Thanks for the info. The apostles always said that they had apostolic authority. I don't see them using the title of priest, and those who were mentioned as priests were believers which came out of the Levitical priesthood and were still jealous of the Law. These people stirred up much anger towards Paul and wanted the gentile converts to be circumcised.